134 Golden Child Made King

The reputation of Henry IVth has changed through history – where he's remembered at all! So we look at that – we are left with those that think Henry was inadequate, and those that he did the best job possible in the circumstances. And then we deal with the first challenge of Henry's reign – the Epiphany Rising.

Images of Henry IVth

The famous image of Henry is this one. It hangs in the National Portrait Gallery in London, and to all intents and purposes it looks as though we are now into the period of authentic likeness, which started with Richard II; prior to Richard all the images we have of kings are 'identikit', stylised images of how a king should look. BUT it turns out that this image is also fake. It was created as part of a series in late Tudor times – 1590-1610 ish. Now by this time, the concept of true likeness was still important; so they made great efforts to find some true likeness they could copy. However in the case of Henry IVth we might suspect that they didn't manage it; but what they seem to have done is make sure at least that his dress is as authentic as possible – in this case it looks very similar, apparently, to contemporary images of Charles VIth of France.

So we should probably be relying more on this image, which his tomb at Canterbury Cathedral. It is pretty much contemporary – 1420-30, by a Derbyshire firm, created in Alabaster.

Having said that, I'm not sure he looks as good – a bit like a small town bank manager, could be in Dad's Army or such like. His figure on the tomb has the interlinked S's of the house of Lancaster – ancestry was important to them.

As it happens, the tomb was opened in 1832. Apparently Henry's features were very well preserved including a deep, and full beard, of a deep Russet colour.

Post navigation

11 thoughts on “134 Golden Child Made King”

I hate to admit it, after such a gracious apology, but I’m afraid I’m not quite sure what the mea culpa was for. That is, not only do I not understand the misinterpretation, I’ve no idea what it was that was misinterpreted or how. Or why. Or who etc.
I liked the bit with the dog, though. 🙂

A while ago I referred to the same incident – where Elizabeth identified herself in the history as Richard II. Foolishly, I thought she was being self doubting, equating her actions with Richards, worrying that her action here tyrannical.
A school boy error.
Good! I thought it was time to introduce to the hound to the listeners. He’s mainly invisible to you lot, he’s a constant part of the editing process for me!!

Why was Prince James was kept as a sausage?
The Preface of 1066 and All That contains an ‘Errata’ section, with the helpful note: “For sausage read hostage”. Similar to the substitution of ‘pheasant’ for ‘peasant’.

I’m almost caught up after a few months of binge-listening. This episode is one of my favorites because of the Winnie, the Shakespeare rant, and the barking dog. Just wonderfully funny.
I enjoy the historiographies and also the mini-histories of Europe. There are so many different facets to your podcast which you regularly address that I honestly don’t know how you find the time to put them all together, not to mention doing it in such a convincing and coherent manner.
It’s far and away the best history podcast out there.

You’re not alone in your estimation (or lack thereof) of Shakespeare, either. Give him his due, but I’ve long thought him a wee bit overrated. (Of course as a “colonial”, I suppose I’m given more leeway for that particular heresy.)

PS- Can’t help but notice that the dog spoke mere moments after the phrases “baying, howling crowd” and “small furry creatures” were uttered in the podcast. Brilliant foreshadowing, I say!
In yer eye, Billy Shakespeare!

Rich, thank you for you kind words. I am a sucker for a spot of flattery.
That dog…thought I should just share the pain. He’s very nice, but, Rob, your suggestion would require a level of brain power well beyond that hound’s capabilities!